Homeopathy today

Time and again, homeopathy becomes the centre of discussions regarding utility or futility of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).

Those who have been experiencing homeopathic treatment themselves often report homeopathy's merits: homeopaths taking a lot of time for first and follow up interviews, reasonably priced homeopathic remedies without harmful sideeffects, and often excellent outcomes, also in chronic and complicated cases, and even when conventional treatment options are exhausted.

Many critics are convinced that homeopathy can not work. They argue that homeopathic remedies are diluted to such an extent that nothing of the original substance is left. If homeopathic remedies were effective, fundamental laws of physics and chemistry would be called into question.

However, many reputable researchers arrive at the conclusion that homeopathic treatment is clinically effective, although, admittedly, an explanation of the mechanism of action of homeopathic remedies is still lacking.

Thus, there is a lot of research activity going on - under extremely difficult financial conditions, by the way, as there is no cash-rich pharmaceutical industry behind homeopathy.

A well known difficulty in clinical studies of homeopathy is that homeopaths do not treat medical conditions, but sick people with individual symptoms. It is almost impossible to find even two persons with exactly the same, say, migraine symptoms. At the same time, serious study statistics require a large number of cases which are as homogenous as possible. Therefore, many studies are taking compromises in their design - which negatively affects their results.

There are other factors influencing the results of clinical studies. They do not just measure the effect of a homeopathic remedy, but a whole "package of care", which, for example, includes the quality of the homeopathic prescription. Homeopathic case analysis is a complex process, which aims to understand the patient holistically and therefore never can be carried out in a schematic way. This is, by the way, one of the reasons why homeopathic training is challenging and requires comprehensive, well-founded education, as well as continuing professional education (CPD) and supervision.

Homeopathic practice requires just as much CPD as conventional medicine. Therefore, increasingly, many medical doctors not only in Switzerland, but also in other countries co-operate with well-trained homeopaths.

On the other side, “homeopath” as a profession is not formalized. So the level of education and experience of each homeopath will vary.

Despite all efforts in the last couple of years, there is no formalized, uniform homeopatic profession in Switzerland. Therefore, you will have to rely on asking. 

Try to get information regarding the nature and comprehensiveness of the homeopathic education, the CPD and supervision. Look out for someone to take enough time for the first interview - at least 1 1/2 or 2 hours. Insist on follow ups in regular intervals, and, above all, on the prescription of only one homeopathic remedy at a time.

And beware of overly optimistic promises - also homeopathy cannot cure everything, and serious therapist are aware not only of the opportunities, but also of the limitations of their treatment (for further informations see here).

Many associations, schools and organisations offering homeopathic education maintain their own registers. In-house lists like these have an important function in that they characterize the professional level of a group of practitioners within the profession. 

However, such registers are of little use for the public or for those in public office, because quality assurance must be independent of teaching institutions, pressure groups or professional associations.

In Switzerland, the Erfahrungsmedizinische Register (EMR) aims to provide such service. Additionally, I am registered as homeopath, teacher and supervisor with the German Stiftung Homöopathie Zertifikat (SHZ). For more information see here.